Personality Cafe banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
41 - 60 of 91 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,382 Posts
I agree with @dagnytaggart that he might very likely be an ESFP in somewhat of an Se-Te loop. I see no conspicuous Ni at all, which is what ENTJs technically "parent" people with (I'm an Ni dom, so detecting Ni is rather easy for me). This seems like a pretty Se-Fi driven move to vent your personal offense to the rest of the world so impulsively without taking consequences into account, or maybe just not finding the consequences all that relevant (inferior Ni & the whole, you hurt my feelings so I'm going to hurt yours back as a "logical" strategy). It seems like the OP has a stereotypical view that anyone who acts like a tough-guy or a bit harsh is an EXTJ, which is pretty much the typical perspective that inferior Te users have of them, overlooking that dominant Te is really mainly about logic above all.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,856 Posts
What exactly is the lesson here?

I'm right ... You're wrong .... I have a gun, and will use it inappropriately?

WTF?
Boiled down to the most basic level, yes, it is a "I'm right" "You're wrong" lesson. It would be paraphrased as "I'm right to punish you for doing something I told you was wrong."

Your post before this:

What he is, is a bad parent.

I think in the big picture this is not about the actions of the kid, it's about bad parenting. If your 15 year-old has to express her pent up anger and frustration on a social media network, what does this say about you as a parent? Obviously, there isn't any sort of respectful dialogue going on between parent and child. Based on what I've seen in the video, his parenting style is very authoritarian and condescending - very "because I said so".

What sort of meaningful interaction can this girl possibly have with a parent who sees the solution to a problem as loading up a firearm and capping off a few rounds? Clearly this is meant to be intimidating. You can hear the anger in his voice on the video. It's no wonder the girl felt that venting on FB was her only outlet. Where else can she express herself? Surely not to her father.

If it goes reaches this level, I see it as the fault of the parent. Surely, this isn't an isolated incident. Tyranny on the part of the ruler eventually will lead to a revolt of the "peasant".

Dude, you are supposedly the adult here. Act like it.
The problem with your "big picture" perspective is that a lot of it is based on assertions, assuptions, and "fill in the blank" ideas about their previous conversations regarding this problem and their household atmosphere in general.

Unforunately, that means most of your argument is not based off fact or evidence. It's an abuse of the socratic method. It's like saying "the father uses a gun in this video. guns are only used by bad men. therefore, the father is a bad man." Only your statement is "only misunderstood teenage girls post nastygrams on their facebook profiles. this girl posted on her facbook profile. therefore, she is misunderstood." Only you take it a step further and say "She is misunderstood. Bad parents create misunderstood children. Therefore, the parents must be bad." In other words, you're using blanket logic and applying everything in absolutes. Which isn't logical at all.

Which doesn't prove he is a bad parent and that the girl is a nice, misunderstood 15-year-old.
 

·
Chatterbox, MOTM August 2013
Joined
·
10,959 Posts
You must be shitting me. Unless you are the world's dumbest homeowner, there is no way you own a house. Your example is completely absurd, not to mention ignorant of basic property laws.


When a couple is married, all housing property obtained thereafter is considered "marital property." It doesn't matter who signed the title or pays the most on the monthly mortgage-- the house is considered a joint asset owned by both husband and wife. If the couple decides they want a divorce, the home doesn't go to the person who paid for it all. You don't have sole ownership of a house because you pay for the monthly mortgage. It gets distributed along other lines [in a divorce court] such as:

The length of the marriage.
• The age and physical and emotional health of the spouses.
• The income or property brought to the marriage by each spouse.
• The standard of living established during the marriage.
• Any written agreement made by the spouses before or during the marriage concerning property distribution.
•The economic situation of each spouse at the time the division of property becomes effective.
•The income and earning potential of each spouse.
•The contribution by each spouse to the education, training or earning power of the other spouse.
•The contribution of each spouse as to the acquisition of any marital property as well as the contribution of a spouse as a homemaker.
•The tax consequences to each spouse.
•The present value of any marital property.
•The need for the custodial parent to remain in the marital home and keep possession of household effects.
•The marital debts and liabilities and the ability of each spouse to pay those debts.
•Any other factors the court may feel are relevant.

If you've ever even glanced through an article on a divorce settlement between a trophy wife and her husband, you'll often find the wife gets a house [or two] in the settlement. She didn't pay for these houses-- they were granted to her by a divorce court that found other factors in her favor [see Equitable Division Law].

To provide another example: a housewife might get the house in a divorce despite her husband's payments on it because the housewife A) worked to maintain the home, therefore increasing its property value B) sacrificed a potential career to help maintain the home and C) managed the household while her husband was away.

In other words, the "house" in your example is not solely the husbands. Which means by burning down the place, he is systematically and deliberately destroying someone else's [his wife's] property.

The computer was clearly stated to have been bought, purchased, and paid for by the dad in the video. It was his property on loan to his daughter.

He has every right to destroy his property because it's his. You do not have the right to destroy your house because it is not exclusively yours.

Apply the law and common sense and you might save yourself from looking like an idiot.
Yes, well ... thank you(?) for all of that, but it is irrelevant to the central point.

No one was disputing whether or not the laptop was his property, or whether or not he had the right to destroy it. The point being made was that it was illogical and wasteful to destroy the laptop.

Nice rant, though. Excellent use of bulletpoints and spacing.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,856 Posts
Yes, well ... thank you(?) for all of that, but it is irrelevant to the central point.

No one was disputing whether or not the laptop was his property, or whether or not he had the right to destroy it. The point being made was that it was illogical and wasteful to destroy the laptop.

Nice rant, though. Excellent use of bulletpoints and spacing.
Look, I hate to tell you this, but you and @carm need to read my original post before making statements about my conversation with @wiarmus.

I made a stand alone statement that was confronted with bad logic. I pointed out the bad logic. End of story.

I was not arguing whether or not it was "illogical and wasteful to destroy the laptop." You are adding sides to my argument that were never there.

For the love of God, please stop doing this.
 

·
Chatterbox, MOTM August 2013
Joined
·
10,959 Posts
Look, I hate to tell you this, but you and @carm need to read my original post before making statements about my conversation with @wiarmus.

I made a stand alone statement that was confronted with bad logic. I pointed out the bad logic. End of story.

I was not arguing whether or not it was "illogical and wasteful to destroy the laptop." You are adding sides to my argument that were never there.

For the love of God, please stop doing this.
Sheesh. You're not going to cry are you?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,856 Posts
Sheesh. You're not going to cry are you?
Not at all. But I'd like to have a conversation that doesn't involve me having to defend points you want me to represent.

EDIT: I'd also already clarified this misunderstanding a few posts back. If you would read what I wrote rather than making assumptions, this wouldn't even be an issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miss Scarlet

·
Chatterbox, MOTM August 2013
Joined
·
10,959 Posts
Boiled down to the most basic level, yes, it is a "I'm right" "You're wrong" lesson. It would be paraphrased as "I'm right to punish you for doing something I told you was wrong."

Your post before this:



The problem with your "big picture" perspective is that a lot of it is based on assertions, assuptions, and "fill in the blank" ideas about their previous conversations regarding this problem and their household atmosphere in general.

Unforunately, that means most of your argument is not based off fact or evidence. It's an abuse of the socratic method. It's like saying "the father uses a gun in this video. guns are only used by bad men. therefore, the father is a bad man." Only your statement is "only misunderstood teenage girls post nastygrams on their facebook profiles. this girl posted on her facbook profile. therefore, she is misunderstood." Only you take it a step further and say "She is misunderstood. Bad parents create misunderstood children. Therefore, the parents must be bad." In other words, you're using blanket logic and applying everything in absolutes. Which isn't logical at all.

Which doesn't prove he is a bad parent and that the girl is a nice, misunderstood 15-year-old.
Way to completely avoid the point. A gun, really?

And ...

If you'll notice, I prefaced my comments with "I think". I was expressing an opinion about his parenting skills.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,856 Posts
Way to completely avoid the point. A gun, really?

And ...

If you'll notice, I prefaced my comments with "I think". I was expressing an opinion about his parenting skills.
I'm not sure what you're referring to regarding the "gun" statement. I only addressed the fact that none of your assertions rely on fact. Simple as that.

And thank you for pointing out the "I think" part. I missed that.

EDIT: Seeing as all your assertions were merely an extension of your opinion, it doesn't really matter whether or not they are factually supported. Which does make my post about them irrelevant to some extent.

EDIT: Although I would add that your opinion is a badly informed one.
 

·
Chatterbox, MOTM August 2013
Joined
·
10,959 Posts
What exactly is the lesson here?

I'm right ... You're wrong .... I have a gun, and will use it inappropriately?

WTF?
Boiled down to the most basic level, yes, it is a "I'm right" "You're wrong" lesson. It would be paraphrased as "I'm right to punish you for doing something I told you was wrong."

.
I'm not sure what you're referring to regarding the "gun" statement. I only addressed the fact that none of your assertions rely on fact. Simple as that.

And thank you for pointing out the "I think" part. I missed that.



EDIT: Seeing as all your assertions were merely an extension of your opinion, it doesn't really matter whether or not they are factually supported. Which does make my post about them irrelevant to some extent.

EDIT: Although I would add that your opinion is a badly informed one.

You replied that it was a right/wrong issue and completely avoided the part about using a firearm.

Well thank you for adding that, but I didn't ask you to critique my opinion. So, your opinion of my opinion is an irrelvant opinion, in my opinion.

Now that we have that settled, is there anything else irrelevant you would like to post to derail this thread even further?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
317 Posts
All this logic stuff goes out the window when you've personally invested so much love into your daughter and she thinks she can do whatever she wants. This daughter cursed out the "cleaning lady", the parents, and publicly shamed herself too in order to "look cool".

A lot of times kids are stupid and emotional, and the only way you can get through to them is by appealing to their emotions instead of logic. Have you ever tried to explain something to a kid who is influenced by their friends, the media, etc. to be rebellious, and every time you try to make a point they do something to try and piss you off instead? That's when the only statement that'll make a permanent impact is something like this since being grounded and explaining things only caused the daughter to sass back.

Here's what I think will happen: The daughter's friends will see this and go "HOLY SHIT! I'M NOT FUCKING WITH THIS GUY!". The general opinion will probably be in support of the dad because the daughter's chores were almost nothing (sweep floor, check dishwasher, wipe counter, make own bed, do own laundry). The approval from the dad's community and the respect given to him by other kids will then influence the daughter to realize how stupid she's been.

p.s. Dear arguing ExTJ females: Please start a mud wrestling contest to sort out who is right.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,856 Posts
You replied that it was a right/wrong issue and completely avoided the part about using a firearm.

Well thank you for adding that, but I didn't ask you to critique my opinion. So, your opinion of my opinion is an irrelvant opinion, in my opinion.

Now that we have that settled, is there anything else irrelevant you would like to post to derail this thread even further?
I ignored your comment about the gun because you said it was being "used inappopriately." IMO, that's an entire other can of worms that needs discussion.

No need to get your panties in a wad. I didn't derail the thread at all-- I answered posts as you, carm, and wiarumas wrote them. If you didn't want my response, don't post. Simple as that.


@SpilledMilk

An excellent point. Sometimes logic doesn't work with kids. In which case, I'll sell them to the local INFP store. They'll take good care of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miss Scarlet

·
Chatterbox, MOTM August 2013
Joined
·
10,959 Posts
I ignored your comment about the gun because you said it was being "used inappopriately." IMO, that's an entire other can of worms that needs discussion.

No need to get your panties in a wad. I didn't derail the thread at all-- I answered posts as you, carm, and wiarumas wrote them. If you didn't want my response, don't post. Simple as that.
The gun comment was central to my point. You avoided replying to it. Still are avoiding it.

and...

I'm not wearing any panties, so there.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,856 Posts
The gun comment was central to my point. You avoided replying to it. Still are avoiding it.

and...

I'm not wearing any panties, so there.
...are you hitting on me?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Finaille

·
Chatterbox, MOTM August 2013
Joined
·
10,959 Posts
...are you hitting on me?
No.

And as usual, you've missed the point, jumped to the wrong conclusion, and STILL haven't addressed the central issue.
 

·
Registered
Introverted intuitive type
Joined
·
5,561 Posts
It could explain his interest in IT and guns which sound a bit more enthusiastic than the average person.
Just throwing this out, my boss at work is a self-confirmed ISTJ, and he knows more about computers and quantum physics than I do. He's also a huge gun fanatic and always talks about his guns, and how patriotic he is. He's pretty '*******', and he could be this facebook dad's personality double. He even dresses the same way and has the same accent.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,856 Posts
No.

And as usual, you've missed the point, jumped to the wrong conclusion, and STILL haven't addressed the central issue.
You can't be sick of me derailing a thread and want me to continue making my points.
 

·
Chatterbox, MOTM August 2013
Joined
·
10,959 Posts
You can't be sick of me derailing a thread and want me to continue making my points.
You still haven't addressed my point. I'll check back later. Give you time to think about it.

TTFN

I'm going panty shopping with @Dear Sigmund
 

·
Chatterbox, MOTM August 2013
Joined
·
10,959 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: Siggy
41 - 60 of 91 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top