thisintegrated

You do have a warmer vibe than INTJs, so that would make sense. I've recently typed like 3 INTJs, and you're definitely more Fe than they are. Not so sure about that. Telepathy is mostly Fe (and a bit Ti), ime. INTJs don't reach out to others as they are Fi users.

Imagine if you got angry before you even know what was happening.. what would that look like? Someone says "hi" to you and you tell them to fuck off and punch them in the face because you chose to feel before even processing what they just said.

???? Evil is a manifestation of anger. If an animal isn't capable of evil that says a lot about the ways in which they're able to use anger. I can't believe you're actually trying to argue that anger comes before logic?? When the ENFP starts using Te.. you know something's not right.

You're more difficult than most, with all the disorders and stuff.. But I've come to a conclusion. ESFJ. Without a doubt.

My typing is much better than what you'd get from 16personalities.com. In fact, I often get DMs asking me to type people, and I'm rarely wrong. E.g. once I typed BuddhistLover, and he said I was wrong. The next day he tells me he was wrong and I was actually right all along. Although 16personalities.com gave me a correct score twice, an ESFJ I know tested as INTJ.. MBTI quizzes are extremely unreliable. If you don't understand the functions, you have no way of confirming your type.

Are animals capable of evil? I.e. torturing others purely for personal satisfaction in seeing despair in their victims? They're not. Since they're incapable of evil, are they capable of holding grudges? Again, not really. So the anger they're capable of seems inherently different from what humans feel. Beyond appearing more aggressive and dangerous to predators, I don't think anger would serve any purpose in animals. What came first would be logic. You can't get angry at someone stealing your food if you can't recognize the logic behind why someone is taking food that is yours. First comes the recognition of what's happening, and then the anger defense mechanism.

Yes, but that's still different to human anger. A cat won't sit in a corner looking angry, feeling overwhelmed with hate for you. Cats don't contemplate their emotions. It increases it at stage Green, but that's it really. Awakening does remove all suffering though. Suffering is created entirely by egoic delusions and attachments. It's the ego that wants "more". Same, actually. I don't know how I feel about it, or if I like it. It's relative to other emotions, so better than some, worse than others. I like sadness as it seems to be almost identical to the emotion of "beauty" (wtf is the beauty emotion?!?). Sadness can't exist without something to be sad about, so the sadder you are, the greater the beauty of whatever was lost, or even just recognized as impermanent. I'm not sure if I can even differentiate between extreme sadness and euphoria. Looks like someone forgot they're an INTJ?? I'm a Ne. What else need I say?

???

lmao, now you've really pissed him off???

They don't really, not in the same way. A cat may hiss and scratch if you pick her up too much, but that's not really anger, just aggression to tell you to stop. omg you really are a Te, aren't you?

It's not. It's a primitive response to being denied something you feel you're entitled to. If you think you deserve the computer to not freeze all the time you may get angry. But you never get angry at how you can't fly as you don't believe you're entitled to this. lol, imagine being able to fly, but 1% of the time you just can't get it to work for like a full minute. You'd get fucking pissed off lmao.

???? Emotions are something you subconsciously create for yourself to achieve some goal. E.g. if you have a fear of being without honor then whenever someone insults your honor you will get angry as a means of getting yourself to respond and defend your honor. Without anger, you may have let the insult go unchallenged. But because you've decided that honor is something worth protecting, emotions come up to help you; to move you to action. Sadhguru doesn't give a shit about honor or anything like that because he's awake enough to know that losing honor is nothing to fear. In fact, there's nothing he fears, so there's nothing for him to defend, and nothing for "anger" to do. Again, how would anger serve him?

"silly theories on attachment" I can't believe you said that???? This is like the simplest, most basic idea in spirituality/actualization/buddhism/etc. Literally no one disagrees with this. Even stage Orange people usually understand this concept. Suffering isn't a physical thing. If someone makes you angry, and they're outside your house but you don't know, will you be angry and negative? Of course not. You can only be angry when you think "he's here?!? Ok, now I'm angry". The person's proximity was irrelevant. Before finding out they there you were happy. If you understand this logic, it should be obvious how all suffering is a product of your mind. If you weren't attached to that person in some way, their presence wouldn't have evoked anger in you. All suffering is caused by attachment, be it to a belief in your abilities, or a belief in your social status, or in a person, or anything else.

The emotion doesn't arise in him at all. Why would it? If anger doesn't serve him, why would he ever experience anger? There's literally nothing you could do to piss him off.

Yes.

A highly developed person can't be "triggered" like you're suggesting. Fear is what's "triggered" in a person to make them angry/annoyed/jealous/etc., but if you have no fear then there's nothing to trigger. Sadhguru doesn't have sad cries. He cries out of overwhelming positive emotion, as this is something he wants. It's not like someone can insult him and he gets triggered and starts having a mental breakdown, as you're suggesting.

Feel the other, but not recreate hell for himself for literally no reason. Suffering just creates more suffering. Sadhguru understands this and wouldn't choose to recreate your suffering within his own consciousness. If you made Sadhguru fall into despair would that make you feel any better? No, so Sadhguru wouldn't make himself suffer randomly just because it's considered "empathetic". He doesn't care about Preety's approval or how good of a person he appears outwardly. Sadhguru would say "Let them suffer if they want, fuck 'em" and that's the enlightened view. And no, if you feel depressed he wouldn't see your depression as his depression. This sounds like some Green misunderstanding of non-duality. To Sadhguru, you're just a picture of a crying kid. Would a picture of a crying kid make sadhguru fall into a deep depression? lol. Your emotions do not exist within Sadhguru's reality. Your emotions are your own. For Sadhguru to feel your emotions he'd have to imagine them and create them for himself, as otherwise they don't exist.

omg this fucking forum.. just pressed "show reply" and it deleted everything I wrote?? Helpful, yes, but unnecessary if the goal is to gain compassion. Trauma from this would cause hundreds of millions to commit suicide, so not worth it. Really jumping around the question here.. btw, simpler to say FI/Fe than emotional empathy, reflexive emotional empathy, etc.

You consider etymology a big word? Anyway.. Would you say you need to suffer the pain of being in a concentration camp when talking to someone who went through this? Are you really saying that unless you literally feel their pain, you will have zero compassion for them? Jeez, I knew INTJs were dark.. but that's next level, lol.

It has its place ..and that place is called stage Blue. But using Gods as a tool is something else. Praying to "Shiva" or "Satan" or "The Stock Market Gods" works in the same way it would work if they were "actually" real.

What? Perhaps if you studied etymology more you'd be familiar with the concept of "language evolution". Empathy: "the ability to understand and share the feelings of another" But even if by empathy you meant, specifically, "mirroring one's emotions" you can mirror the emotion/discomfort without letting it affect you—letting it make you suffer. Discomfort isn't suffering. It takes an ego for discomfort to become suffering. And no one would gain anything from you choosing to suffer. Sadhguru wouldn't suffer if he saw @Carl-Richard crying.. and neither should anyone else.

Yes. Sensors, specifically. Most sensors I know love tv shows and films. But they all hate anime, and/or think anime's for kids just because it's animated and they can't fathom the idea of an adult animation. They also just don't care. They don't care that there's a medium of entertainment they're potentially missing out on. For sensors, "no experience with x = no desire for x". Sensors don't care about potential, because potential is an abstract idea, and sensors don't do abstract thinking. I would bet that before tv shows and films became a popular thing, sensors considered them stupid. It's only because everyone's grown up with a tv in the house that films are now considered normal by sensors. A more relevant example might be streaming. Streaming was, at first, only something intuitive types engaged in. Now that Netflix has gone mainstream in the past few years, sensors are starting to use Netflix too, but still only in the most developed countries. All MBTI types with S. E.g. ESTP, ESFJ, ISTP, etc.

If Sadhguru saw you crying, do you think he'd feel horrible and depressed? Of course not. He could if he wanted to, and he'd likely have a good understanding of how you're feeling, but he wouldn't voluntarily make himself feel depressed just because he saw a sad person. The more evolved someone is, the more control they have over their emotions. Every moment in Sadhguru's life is happy. Even if someone he knew died, he'd still be happy. He'd be sad, but he'd still be happy. Happiness doesn't come from anything. It's your natural state, and nothing should be able to take it away from you ..unless you're still immature and are still controlled by external influences.

Sure I know what suffering is. I just don't take my own suffering seriously. No one should. No matter what happens, life goes on, and any attachment to suffering is 100% your own doing. Yes I'm unempathetic, I'm an ENTP. Not only are emotions not a big focus for me, but I think everyone should be less sensitive. Although I'm less emotional, I'm happier than most emotionally sensitive types such as yourself. The more space negativity takes up, the less space is left for love and happiness. You should aspire to be more like me Suffering is 90% just worrying about suffering. If you stopped judging everything as good and bad, nothing would bother you. Learning to laugh at suffering is an essential skill you must learn sooner or later (though I think this may be a level Yellow ability, so might not make sense yet..) If you take on other people's suffering, that's an unhealthy/immature ego. If you take your own suffering seriously, that's an unhealthy/immature ego. We shouldn't be enabling unhealthy egos. We should, instead, be providing opportunities for people to overcome their egoic delusions.

Interesting. The tritype I'm most familiar with? "784: Curve Surfer. Direct, original, independent and creative. Moody and non conformist, powerful, original visionary. 7w8|SX"