Natasha Tori Maru

Orthodox Jewish Conformity @Vynce thanks for the share ! @Leo Gura conformity is your enemy is it? I try to keep my relationship with conformity strictly professional: the fucker keeps trying to manage me, and I keep submitting variations 😈😈😈 Thanks for the blog post

Hmmm, this discussion seems to be presenting a distinction between authenticity and competence. I can see that simply being genuine doesn't automatically make the way you express yourself socially effective. You can authentically express insecurity, neediness, avoidance, poor boundaries, or social cluelessness. A la @Olaf's angle. But I also agree with the argument that consciously learning a skill doesn't necessarily mean you're being fake. A beginner musician might consciously think about technique; an expert eventually embodies it and no longer experiences it as technique.

@Emerald cheers. To be clear I do not disagree with you, this is more questions surrounding your model. I think subjective access and empirical generalisability are two different things I note you use the phrase "tactics" - but what if you replaced that with "expertise". One could easily phrase it in another way to be more palatable to women. So instead of "he used tactics to increase attraction" it becomes "he used expertise to increase attraction". Because eventually, using methods and frames for attraction, the aim would be to accumulate enough wisdom for expertise to be reached via the frame "training wheels". And the purpose of applying the tactics would be to reach expertise. The frame / method being discarded later.

What could I say to falsify this? I ask because I can definelty agree with all of these explanations (especially the special snowflake point, the most common one used on me, which I think can be valid but is poor argumentation). But the model of behaviour here seems to say "anyone who disagrees, is further evidence for my theory". I get sketchy when I model is self sealing like this. How do you see a way out to an alternative that the model doesn't fit?

Definitely could explain it. It could also be the thing being critiqued - men using mechanisms to explain dynamics or analyse women, is the exact thing being done in reverse - in your post you analysed and applied a mechanism to the explain behaviour of men. Maybe the resistance to your view wasn't the accuracy of it, but the method engaged. Psychoanalysis of others tends to turn them against me when I do it - the truth of the message gets lost.

@KosmicGeng mbti is a bit pseudosciencey to me. A useful frame on occasion. A curious lens. I view MBTI as how we process information and make decisions. Enneagram more what we are psychologically trying to avoid, secure, or protect. Deeper.

@Joshe remarkable how similar the growth process you describe is, to my own. Jesus. I think I am heavy Te - but it's all expressed in construction and my work. I tend to flirt with it less so in cognitive realms like philosophy, metaphysics or forum dialogue. It may not be manifesting here because it is spent in real life? But also, I am a woman, and socialised to prioritise feelings and group cohesion. So I have had certain other functions beaten in to me, so to speak. I don't mind being wrong really. But for me, the stupid Ni can shift frames to mean so many things can be looked at as right/wrong! Not all. The forum is low stakes, so being wrong here is okay. Being wrong on my takeoff for a hebel cladding estimate could fold my business though.... So it's fair to say that risk assessment may be happening subconsciously. Lucky I am decisive as fuck. Which is also why I am okay being wrong too - I make decisions based on what limited information I have. If it's wrong I am all good taking responsibility. If you are anything like me with emotions though, sometimes I just get charged up and dig my heels in. Which is out of alignment to my normal rational self. Which is all humans really 😁 and also why I try to not explain someone's psychology or pathologise them with my elaborate internal mechanistic explanations. Maybe they were just having a bad day! Maybe I should try break my Ni with Si for a bit, instead of going meta meta into recursive nightmares (which is incidentally why I think you and I zoom all over the shop with conversation, it's in an infinite recursion happening in real time). Enjoyed the chats I think I understand you better, rather than just explain behaviour ⚡

This passage is interesting to me. If expressing yourself in this way is "authentic" expression, but it causes offense and runs up against a value (in this case harmony, unintended alienation) was it really authentic expression? If our authenticity is violating a value, it seems to me something may NOT be authentic and expressed as truth. Maybe it points to something unintegrated that is yet to be revealed (IE on our unconscious awareness). And once we find that truth within us, connect to it, our authentic expression won't contradict one of our values. Authenticy is a complex topic - and it relates to values. When we feel like expression is totally in the moment we often label it as authentic - but is it really if it runs up against a core value?

@oOo interested in what in particular reads as "try hard" from Emerald? I feel like that could just as easily be applied to me, really 😅😅😅

What's missing is instead of analysing the dynamics, one should be focusing on relating to the other person. Relational understanding is more conducive to "frame control" or "leadership". When someone feels truly seen, understood and known - they become remarkably receptive and open to alternative frames, perspectives and opinions. You can truly influence someone this way. Women are particularly sensitive to being analysed and seen through a "frame" which often endeavours to explain her instead of understand. It severs the experience from the person. Map vs territory issue. At work, I don't try to control subcontractors through any sort of frame or understanding. I relate to their experience, their troubles & I negotiate a solution that ties into their meaning. As soon as they feel seen, they feel validated. They will follow my lead. Psychoanalysis or logically trying to understand them never rallies or incentivizes them to work 5 hour of O/T like connection though relational understanding does.

100% If I understand you correctly - You possibly learned through direct, relentless feedback from reality/real world experience. Trial and error, and probably a good mix of variation within that experience (and contradictory feedback), meaning you incurred less bias. But also, to learn what you did most likely also meant you DIDN'T prematurely close in on a frame and become locked. I don't know how you experience Ni, but for me it is really tacit. I have no fucken idea how I come to the conclusions or knowings I have - and I continually have to reverse engineer from the conclusion explicitly to understand (and I've been burned by my tacit conclusions often enough now I make a really concerted effort to never simply roll with my 'Knowings"). So often I am taken aback by conversations based on game, PUA, frame etc I used to not understand why someone would need this sort of frame to guide them, because I so naturally built one up in what appears to be an unconscious way. It becomes a map vs territory issue. Learning the frame then applying (and learning its limitations in the process) vs learning and building a frame from direct experience. Both definitely require challenges, fear, anxiety and courage. Both have different types of pitfalls. Explicit frames being learned and applied, to me, seem so alien... but I see the use. And I have come to use these methods as an alternative to my straight Ni. I am almost trying to break my Ni at this time in my life, if that makes sense. to "get out' of it, because it is so much of my processing I cannot make it out clearly. I cannot see my eyes.

EXACTLY Take THAT @LordFall Precision vs accuracy maybe? We must unify to become the ultimate powerhouses

That's it! Yes and that was the user @theleelajoker While I can never be certain regarding MBTI - it is always INTJ's that I clash with on some fundamental, unnamed level. It feels like I agree but don't agree, I see but don't see. My Dad is an INTJ also and works with me *shudder* When I clash with him it is literally the immovable object meeting the unstoppable force. We only reconcile after stepping away, both of us going meta regarding the arguement and our own thinking, then re-approaching with either a new perspective or one of us becoming willing to toss theirs. Both of us are relentlessly persistent which can be great when applied to a permanent relationship (provided we can resolve conflict). I have become a lot better with resolution... But not necessarily lowering conflict 😅 Needless to say I think it the Ni Ni clash can be a great avenue for growth

I think I am more pondering and thinking and less proposing an argument - or refuting you Many of my responses are "hey, you triggered this pattern match or thought!" then I post. The sisters part - I vaguely VAGUELY recall maybe you said that - but I cannot remember if it was you or another member (who was banned, forgot his name, but he had really good interesting views, I think his avatar was a jester). So I was hoping you would correct me by affirming/denying. And the assumption there was that if you did confirm you had a sister - this would explain why these social dynamics / mechanisms with women (and outside of the romance domain) are just totally obvious to you I tend to be cautious of premature closure - which is sort of the opposite axis that you take, maybe? Steer toward closure + find the pattern across domains. I do that to for sure, but I like to pull back so I don't get stuck in frame lock (which I tended to fall into 4/5 years ago a lot). This isn't so good because my pondering and questioning can, if not put forth with clean, neutral rhetoric, can come across as me trying to rip apart someone's epistemology (and this can be deeply distressing to some people, so I am practicing being extra cautious). I think I often probe really deep trying to come up with heuristics I can apply - and even steal others heuristics they have developed. I think many times you have replied to something I didn't say - but could be inferred. I have done the same with you as well! I find the continued dialogue an unusual exercise in Ni vs Ni that is almost amplifying weaknesses in different ways. Maybe functioning like a mirror. A god awefull house of mirrors warped one LOL I am often not even trying to win. I don't need closure. But this can be infuriating to some Another factor is: my statements can sometimes be vague and when questioned or engaged they become clearer in meaning as I go (this isn't intentional, something I am trying to work on as well). Often troubles can be simply reduced down to the need for the question "what do you mean by that?"

I did not mean to imply you weren't aware. I didn't assume you weren't. Just making conversation. I think I was illustrating that this is the ideal way - but treating the frame as provisional.... I feel it needs to be reinforced more. I can find many examples of people who don't treat it that way!!! Why lol?