Akemrelax

You don’t get to define tyranny. There’s ever going to be a universal definition of tyranny. Chinese think their presence in Hong Kong is not tyrannical. Saying you will burn down the system if it doesn’t treat you right is not terrorism, that’s literally what the founders said. He is warning the government to do it job. If you have a problem with that statement you have a problem with the founders .

The people have the right to defend against a tyrannical government! That’s why y’all have the second amendment. If the government doesn’t treat black people right then they have the right to burn the system down, that’s what he said. Again, if you’re sooooo worried about people becoming terrorists then take away their weapons . The intellectual dishonesty is on your side buddy.

Yea but it’s just that the way he said makes him sound like he doesn’t think it’s a crime. He could’ve said we have to follow rule of law and due process. Even Joe Rogan seemed a little annoyed. It’s just bad communication skills that’s all I’m sayings.

@Serotoninluv I see almost no response though. His song is in recently trending with 4.8m likes. How can people be this stupid?

@Apparition of Jack Yes, but stage green is usually the most proactive nowadays. They're literally outraged about everything but this somehow slips their mind.

Did Bret really needed to bring up "that it may not be a murder" comment? He makes such dumb statements then wonders how people misunderstood him. He has no communication skills. Typical INTP attachment to ideas and lack of social skills.

Hey forum, Lately I have been interested in personality. I was going through YouTube when I came across a YouTuber talking about how they had a romantic relationship since they were four and how they were aware that people though of them as attractive. It got thinking, that maybe their attractiveness and the fact that they had a big family are a big reason why they are extraverted and engaged with the world. In contract, an only child with below average looks may be more isolated and be more inclined towards being imaginative and introverted. They may only be appreciated when they get high grades, so they get pushed into finding pleasure in intellectual activities. This got me thinking how our personality are shaped by little things like that. So, I want you go through the annals of your past memories and think about an event, physical trait, person, social norm, or anything that has shaped your personality the most. Once you find that share it down below with us to study and learn from.

Feeling has to do with having a sense of right/wrong and good/bad. This model does not account for how connected to actuality (meditative) a person is, which is one of it's major flaws.

This movie/novel covers stage red very well.

I thought people in America had a right to defend against a tyrannical government. He is just stating his right. If you’re that worried about people taking over the government why don’t you take down the second amendment? It can’t be “they’re only allowed to defend if I think it’s a tyrannical government.”

Exactly what I said. America needs fewer guns.

I think you really lack perspective here. You should watch the media of other countries like India then you will realize the USA’s is FAR better. If you don’t get your facts from the mainstream media, where do you get them from? Ultimately you have to go to them. https://rsf.org/en/ranking

Hi guys, Lately I have been seeing a lot of discussion in the forum about the MBTI personality types (INTP, INTJ, etc.). Forgive me, I couldn't stop myself, but I think MBTI is just not true. From what I have gathered from reading about it and watching videos it is not a good predictor of your personality or your cognitive functions. I did 4 different test and got different results. It may appear a simple test based upon 4 easy to understand parameters but if you actually go into it its's not. One thing is that there is no agreed upon definition of MBTI. Another is that, I don't see many of the distinctions in MBTI in my direct experience. Like what's the difference between extraverted thinking and extraverted intuition? Or introverted feeling and introverted sensing? And is it a useful distinction in terms of psychology? I made this post to warn anybody who is taking MBTI too seriously, and to hear from people who think it is true why it is true. Ime going into it was a huge time sink. It is the best way to get cut off from actuality and get lost in concepts. I'm eager to hear from you if you disagree with me.

Or maybe they got it through inheritance like Donald Trump.

Yea. Not to mention different definitions everyone has. MBTI has prompted me to think deeper about introversion and extroversion. Instead of describing it in terms of behaviour preference for social interactions, I and E can be described as a preference for looking at the world through a cultural/societal framework or differing from that framework (it’s not suppose to be a behaviourist model). Like an extraverted person, under this definition , would look at objects as ‘literally’ as possible. Meaning when they see a cat, they label it a cat and move on. An introvert would question the agreed upon ‘definition’, thus isolating them from others. Extroverts would, in practice, be confident because they’re not stopping to question things, sociable because they share societies framework, decisive, and competitive because they are comparing things based on society’s framework/ruler. Introverts would, in practice, be less social because they’re not buying societies labels, indecisive, curious, less competitive, and averse to taking in too much data because they want to process it. It may seem that I’m being unfair to extroverts, but their traits really help communicate ideas, organize society, get stuff done, and survive. They have a lot of value. Introverted traits, in excess, could make you insane if your reality is too different than the rest. It’s worth noting that when MBTI describes a trait as being ‘focused on outside objects’ it doesn’t mean it in the meditative, Buddhist-Zen sense but more so as giving things clear labels. Like looking at a cat as a cat and not cat = metaphor. Usually extraverted is described as “focusing on objects instead of self (thoughts)” and sensing as “being in the present”, it’s important to know they are not talking about it in the meditative sense but in the “objective” labeling sense.

My problem is not that it is scientific or not (although that's a discussion to be has as well) but more about the vagueness and I don't think the differences are that significant. Like since everyone uses all the functions, saying I use 'x' more really doesn't tell us much. You mentioned intuition. So what's the difference between Te (extraverted thinking), and Ne (extraverted intuition)? To me they are the same or have very little difference. And if someone who can do Te can easily do Ne imo, just like someone who can do inductive reasoning won't have that hard time doing deductive reasoning. From what I know, intuition is described as seeing the possibilities and thinking is described as 'reasons'.

My problem isn't so much with being in the middle. You're right I am in the middle, I got 51% for two of the letters, which prompted me to look more in depth. I am saying that I don't understand what the underlying definitions are of the cognitive functions. For example, what's the difference between Ti (thinking + introverted) and Ni (intuitive + introverted). What's the different between Ti and Si? And every time I get a sense of the definition of these terms, the types are then described very differently then I had thought. Different sources say different things, different definitions. It's vague, sloppy work. For example, ISTP have these as their 1st and 2nd functions: Ti: deductive reasoning Se: gathers data So, somebody who has strong principles who then views the objects around them through those principles? Nope, it turns they kinesthetic learners, who are good with tools. ESTP has these: Se: gathers data Ti: deductive reasoning ESTP are forthright, pragmatic, and straightforward. Do you see how this is trippy to some people (like me) so vague and ambiguous? I can't make the connection between the cognitive functions and the type description. It's confusion. Although, as I learn about it I am beginning to see some connections.

Fitting the description doesn’t make it true. I’ve fit the description of my zodiac sign when I glance over the newspaper, but then I see that I also fit the description of all the other signs. Have you tried comparing your MBTI type with all the other types? Do you know the underlying cognitive functions of your type? Idk about you, but when I come across a concept I like to verify it to see if it’s true, there’s a lot of BS out there. And hey I’m open minded to it. Right now I’m reading Jung’s Psychological Types and watching videos. You asked me a question now let me ask you one. Why do you have a resistance (or as it seems) to me questioning mbti? Consider this, maybe you like to gather new concepts but don’t like to determine if they’re true or not? @Himanshu I’ll chrck them out as soon as I finish Psychological Types by Carl Jung. The youtube channel objective personality is good too.

Like I said, to learn about MBTI, because it doesn’t make sense to me (thread is named ‘discussion’ for a reason). I think people are believing in it without really understanding it. But people just assume close minded bad intent, no one has provided any explanation or tried to clear my confusion. Maybe that says something? Idk Would you say the same thing if people where discussing astrology or hand writing to determine personality? Or would make a post questioning if it is true?

Okay I’ll give it a read and come back. If I like it maybe I’ll read Gifts Differing too.

I actually spend a good amount of time looking into it. Why do you even comment if you want to spread negativity? If you actually wanted to help you would explain MBTI instead of calling me learning disabled.

@modmyth Yes, I agree with you. I actually tried to research this with an open mind but it just doesn’t make sense that’s why I am open to hearing from people. I think there are some types in there like INTP which is suppose to be a scientific nerd and INFP which is suppose to be the lost artist that attracts people. But the other types are less stereotypical. Plus it’s hard to see the distinction between many of the ‘cognitive functions’ and the ‘logic’ of why certain ‘cognitive functions’ result in certain types. Plus it seems there is a lot of disagreement.

You can't make a distinction between stage yellow and stage red? You can't make a distinction between different types of cars? You know perfectly well what I mean. You're purposely bringing in non-duality to prove me wrong.

Some concepts are more accurate than others. SP can be used in a practical way, MBTI cannot. SD can be used to predict behaviour, patterns of thinking, values, etc. I cannot see the distinctions MBTI makes in real life, like the ones I mentioned above. Making a claim and not providing any explaining doesn’t add much to the discussion. Just saying.

@modmyth Thing is that some people take it seriously because it is marketed as being kinda sciency. MBTI 'experts' claim you can't look at behavior to determine type because MBTI doesn't account for behavior. It gets super confusing when you dig deep into it. Like the terms used are differently defined in Jungian terms, 'feeling' is not the conventional definition of feeling.