Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
250 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Example:
I started my new university last week,and we have a statistics teacher that has a bad reputation to the older students and everyone calls her words like "bitch","Hitler" etc.. Last Thursday we had our first class with her and honestly even though she is not warm and sweet,you could tell that she actually cares about what she does and tries to help us as much as possible..This Monday,some students made a facebook group chat and they added me in it.After a lot of painful forced smalltalk that people use to "bond",they started trashing that teacher very harshly just because they knew it was cool to hate her and they would appear more popular..I actually even talked with some of these people after her class on Thursday and everyone was surprised at how decent she was at her job but now that they were in the group chat apparently they all agreed that she sucks.
Then I felt that sense of injustice and hypocrisy that I've felt many times before on school and despite the fact that I wanted to keep my image clean,I sent a big answer in the group chat (to like 30 people) about how she was decent at her job,that not everyone has to be sweet and smiley in order to be good,and that it's very cheap to judge others just to appear cool. I tried to be as polite as possible so it didn't go very bad afterwards.
I believe that it's not really an emotional thing though.I didn't really feel actually bad for the teacher.It's more because I like everything to be judged fairly and objectively.
Can other people here relate to this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,780 Posts
Yep. I have a strong sense of fairness. Even when the bad reputation is warranted, I feel 'some type of way' when people talk shit about that person as if they're a gang. In that case, it's not really feeling bad for the maligned person, but disgusted with the group because they wouldn't say those things to that person's face.

There's something ugly about a group of people ragging on something. I can take it for a bit but after a while I think 'OK, guys. That's enough.'
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,271 Posts
Injustice used to burn me badly. I hated it. I even thought about being a lawyer. Fortunately around that time I came across some quotes: "Those who love justice fear injustice to themselves" and "In the little world in which children have their existence, whosoever brings them up, there is nothing so finely perceived and so finely felt as injustice" (Dickens, Great Expectations). This made something in me click and I let it go.

Now my position is much more laid back. What other humans choose to do is neither my interest, my responsibility nor within my control. I'm not social enough to care and not irrational enough to try to impose my sense of right/order onto the world (I don't like the odds). My idea of improving the world is being happy and making a positive contribution in some form. Spending my life 'fighting' is too focused on the negative (and people) for my taste.

Not that anyone is going to be kicking cat's or similar within my view. I don't participate in gossip and leave if a group is bullying someone in front of me. I generally draw a line in the sand around me before I lay back on my lawn chair to enjoy the shit-show that is human nature. As cool and relaxed as I am from my more objective view, if someone crosses my line to hurt me personally (or my loved one), I will deliver justice, with a pretty pink bow, just for them. Typical 'true neutral' INTJ here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
642 Posts
Yes. You can waffle and debate what constitutes "justice" precisely or why people pursue it (and whether their reasons in any way credit or discredit the pursuit), but between aversion to seeing harm done lightly, resistance to group think that leads to bad reasoning, respect for truth as a concept, recognition that consistency of thinking requires I acknowledge for all others the rights I'd like recognized for myself, and acknowledgment that throwing individuals under the train can derail the train, most people would say I'm justice-conscious. For example, after seeing firsthand some questionable police tactics at recent protests in my area I'll shortly be undergoing Legal Observer training with the ACLU. I am also prone to calmly interceding in harsh conversations to try and restore some relative fairness/perspective.

None of this is very affective for me either. It's about creating situations and ideas/principles that enable clarity and stability, how I feel in the moment doesn't factor in. (I won't say this means I'm "objective" as I've yet to meet any morally objective person. Even "me and mine first" is essentially a subjective stance in that there's no absolute reason to prefer it. But I'm not by any means a bleeding heart type when it comes to how I make my decisions and form opinions.)

Bonus: I think ethics is particularly interesting because it's one of the only areas of thought where science and empiricism are imo of limited usefulness.

INTJs aren't all like that though, no. Then again plenty are (moral content and cognitive functions are none too closely related - it's definitely an area where you will see lots of intratype diversity). Those with less scopey Fi or just certain philosophical tendencies can be deeply selfish, cynically but unrealistically myopic and/or engage in a lot of "might makes right" thinking through Te.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
There are two sides to every story. I always put things in perspective and analyze it from all angles. I also don't judge based on feelings. In some way when the majority "hates" someone, I go and study why. Typically it is because that individual challenged a preconceived notion with irrefutable facts. This I like and tend to side with the hated individual. I never go based on what I feel, but what is, and if there is no fact, what I believe. Never emote, it generates a bias that even you won't see. I also tend to separate myself from the world's stupidity. Until they make it my problem, then they have a more significant problem (and a headache).
 

·
Delphic Seer
Joined
·
18,076 Posts
I couldn’t care less about fairness as an axiological concept. However, as a realist who favours competence above any other criteria, I support / endorse / promote meritocracy whenever I can.

On the other hand, regardless of individual ideological preferences, a dispassionate analysis of reality as it is reveals life isn’t fair:

 
  • Like
Reactions: PiT

·
Registered
Joined
·
98 Posts
I relate. I hate it when there're wrong things around me. I love balance.
But I wouldn't do what you did.
A long message that tells them they're not decent... I don't believe in it. People tend to do not listen.

You don't just say to someone: "You're not ok." or "You're wrong."
You make one realize that.

I would probably convey it by asking someone some fuzzy questions which build a move to make them realize what I want. Or not even realize what I want, but do what I want anyway.
I enjoy those things.

But honestly, in your case... I don't think I would be troubled.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,864 Posts
I have been a few times in your position (the hypocrisy of some students going against a professor just to be cool happened recently in one of my classes too), but mostly when I was younger.

During high school, my intp classmate who was closest to me and who used to follow me around everywhere was bullied by some of the other classmates. She'd confessed before she had a history of being bullied. I'd listened to it while thinking none of the things she'd recalled would ever happen on my watch - the mention of the word 'bullying' had triggered me a bit, yes, and not because I was deluded and didn't know what bulling was (in fact, I knew exactly what it meant as I was being marginalised myself), but because I had gotten people out of such situations before.

When I actually witnessed the cruelty of how some kids acted towards her, that was maybe the only time I insulted people by openly describing to them what kind of imbeciles they were for doing what they did. I had stood up to those kids before, and I wouldn't get much attention from them, so I guessed they silently respected me, if only slightly. From then on they stopped bullying the girl and some took her in as part of their social group.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Davidkal

·
Plague Doctor
INTJ, 5w4, Ni-T type
Joined
·
6,040 Posts
I really don't like hypocrisy in general and I *really* don't like inauthenticity or saying things just because it's "cool" or that's just the way it's done; teacher X always gets trashed.

The situation you described - that would have bothered me, too. I don't know just how much, but it would have bothered me enough to have contemplated it. But then, I think it would be more relevant to my desire to try to understand behavior/social practices of people in general because most of the behavior I witness (whether it's injustice or not) really confuses me.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
601 Posts
Likewise, I dislike injustice, as I did have experiences of the negative kind. I would seek nothing but fairness because of it. In terms of authenticity to one's self (Fi cognitive function definition) I do maintain a very similar stance to @brightflashes description above. Authenticity is probably one of the most positive things a human-being as a whole can have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,053 Posts
I can relate to this. I have had meh teachers in terms of dubious teaching ability, but I have never had a teacher who was truly evil or mean. I really don't like backtalk against a teacher, especially if its behind closed doors. If you have a disagreement with the teacher, confront the teacher directly about it.

Maybe it's because I was raised with a sense of respect for senior figures since that is a big part of Asian culture...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
I find the hyperemotionalism of mob mentality absolutely disgusting. There is a difference of protest to address grievances and just flat out emotionally lynching someone. And yes, it's not due to overwhelmoing love of the object, but it's more to balance out rabid groupthink.

I once had a manager at work that everyone also said was horrible, strict, Hitler, etc. but I gave her a chance and she was one of the most fair, harworking people I've ever worked with and enjoyed the most part of her term there. While I have zero love of humanity or no affection toward people in general, objectively, I believe in giving everyone a chance until you lose it.

And in regards to teachers or other people in authority, I personally have had teachers (Catholic schools here) who were literally mean, abusive, and incompetent or just plain careless, AND i've had teachers that were military strict, but were the epitome of impersonal and were not in any way abusive or mean. Being strict is not necessarily being mean or abusive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,803 Posts
I believe that it's not really an emotional thing though.I didn't really feel actually bad for the teacher.It's more because I like everything to be judged fairly and objectively.
Can other people here relate to this?
this is the only actual choice i still remember from the mbti: justice is more important than mercy. if it had been a pencil-and-paper test i would have bored a hole through the 'yes' bubble on that one.

i do relate to it. i relate too to how you didn't make it about her feels and what they would be if she could hear the trash talk, but just about the [in]validity of their excuses for being so harsh. i've noticed that most of the times when i stay out of things it's because i don't like faceoffs where it just seems like each side is trying to out-emo the opposite one.
 

·
Registered
ENTJ; 8w7; Persian C
Joined
·
9,469 Posts
It would depend on the "degree," - I am more responsive to abuse and/or strong antagonism (&) intimidation of weaker specimens, than to simply run to the rescue of those that are simply having a bad day from their boss; or that aren't being "treated fairly," or with absolute 'fairness'. I have no interest in that regard, as most of the time, it is all emotions.

I am more interested in protection of those [that cannot protect themselves] as they the lack the capacity / skills / intellect / strength (whatever it may be), to bring sanity and peace to themselves without external help. In other word(s), my goal is to reduce unnecessary / useless suffering if I have the tools, capacity, skills, intellect, strength to practically/pragmatically do so.

This is why I went into the my field, so that I can be summoned to attend to them (appropriately/best to my abilities), and assist by all means necessary - rather than run around screaming justice on random humaniods - as that is a self-defeatist fetish; & I do not have this desire and I am a bit apathetic if not summoned - of if the specimen is not under/within extreme distress. Most times, I am simply trying to do my time (&) move on, I prefer a bit of structure and more power, so that my efforts cause demonstrable change - than simple informalities; the only way to gain this structure / power is going into the field of study that emphasizes on structure & power. I am willing to submit to authority if necessary; to destroy it from inside out.

My field deals with eliminating (threats), survellience, investigation, foreign intelligences / terrorism /
protection and preventative care; rather than directly, "saving the day," or heroism. Many American's feel "betrayed" by those of my kind, however my goal is with good intent. In regards to 'saving the day', I do not mind the latter if it is necessary & under appropriate conditions (going through the system). Under the right conditions [which needed't be through a system always], I am willing to sacrifice myself for specimens under extreme distress and/or duress, that need immediate action. Many times I have done this. I can think of a few scenarios where my health/life/well-being have been risked. A lot of people have expressed feeling safe around me, especially other female-humanoids.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
103 Posts
As was said before: Like other INTJs I tend to separate a question of justice and fairness completely from my own bias. Even if that means that I see I am not right and I tend to correct that voluntary at my own cost. But unfortunately, if it is the other way round, most other people are quite happy if they profit from unfairness and you have to fight to get your rights. So, yes, it sucks. But I think lawyer would be the worst case if you have such a sense of justice. If your client tells you he did commit the crime, you would be in a very bad conflict. I think judge would be the far better option.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,168 Posts
I have trouble with the concept of justice. It's hard to know what it means and how it should be applied. That MBTI question @lilysocks referred to, the one about justice vs mercy? I had no idea how to answer it. Justice matters, no doubt, but sometimes mercy can save a person. That matters too.

It is easier for me to think in terms of respect and value. I believe it is important to respect each person's dignity, autonomy, and rights. I believe that every person has value, and should be treated that way. I believe that it is impossible and inappropriate to treat each person equally, but it is important to treat each person fairly. I believe that kindness is important and makes our lives better.


More thoughts: A just world without mercy would be a cold, cold place. But a world with mercy but without justice would be terrible and cruel. You need both. Justice for the structure, mercy for the grace.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,739 Posts
I find the hyperemotionalism of mob mentality absolutely disgusting. There is a difference of protest to address grievances and just flat out emotionally lynching someone. And yes, it's not due to overwhelmoing love of the object, but it's more to balance out rabid groupthink.

I once had a manager at work that everyone also said was horrible, strict, Hitler, etc. but I gave her a chance and she was one of the most fair, harworking people I've ever worked with and enjoyed the most part of her term there. While I have zero love of humanity or no affection toward people in general, objectively, I believe in giving everyone a chance until you lose it.

And in regards to teachers or other people in authority, I personally have had teachers (Catholic schools here) who were literally mean, abusive, and incompetent or just plain careless, AND i've had teachers that were military strict, but were the epitome of impersonal and were not in any way abusive or mean. Being strict is not necessarily being mean or abusive.
Mob mentality is really the worst of it. People get together and agree on an interpretation to advance, and this interpretation can be completely contrary to reality. Owing to the Fe PoLR, this is a particularly big concern for INTJs as we are more likely than most to contradict the mob mentality. I largely keep my opinions to myself because my greatest fear is being a victim of mob mentality.

It only makes it worse that, as you point out, some very competent and talented people end up getting blackballed because they demand something of you. Most people are lazy and breaking through that sphere of laziness earns you their distaste, and potentially subjects you to that mob mentality. Really this is the biggest problem facing academia today thanks to teaching evaluations and sites like RateMyProfessor; students are pressuring professors to drop standards, and so college students are learning less and less. Human socialization serves as a crutch for people to not realize their potential and holds us back in a big way by unjustly punishing those who do seek to be competent and work hard.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,042 Posts
Injustice used to burn me badly. I hated it. I even thought about being a lawyer. Fortunately around that time I came across some quotes: "Those who love justice fear injustice to themselves" and "In the little world in which children have their existence, whosoever brings them up, there is nothing so finely perceived and so finely felt as injustice" (Dickens, Great Expectations). This made something in me click and I let it go.

Now my position is much more laid back. What other humans choose to do is neither my interest, my responsibility nor within my control. I'm not social enough to care and not irrational enough to try to impose my sense of right/order onto the world (I don't like the odds). My idea of improving the world is being happy and making a positive contribution in some form. Spending my life 'fighting' is too focused on the negative (and people) for my taste.

Not that anyone is going to be kicking cat's or similar within my view. I don't participate in gossip and leave if a group is bullying someone in front of me. I generally draw a line in the sand around me before I lay back on my lawn chair to enjoy the shit-show that is human nature. As cool and relaxed as I am from my more objective view, if someone crosses my line to hurt me personally (or my loved one), I will deliver justice, with a pretty pink bow, just for them. Typical 'true neutral' INTJ here.
''It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness''. - Disputed Source.

Or reveling in the darkness. Or just ignoring it. Whatever suits your case. Matter of fact is, your odds aren't as bad if you are respected. What other people do is my business insofar as I know they can also do that to me. And if I don't harness the image of someone who doesn't stand injustice, I'm setting myself up to be someone for whom no one will stand either. You can't play the invisible act for long, especially if you're good at something.

If you know you are respected and you still don't have the courage to put down injustice where you see it, you're just lazy not rational. Because doing the opposite will earn you 2 things you definitely want to have: A just environment (here's why it matters: http://ncase.me/trust/) and a reputation as someone worthy. The alternative gains you nothing, just keeps you out of sight and out of mind. You'll be surprised at how easily and willingly people listen to you if they think you're worth their time.

Oh and I love this quote: ''The hottest place in hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of crises''. (Dante Aleghieri)
I don't believe in hell, but good thing that I know lazy people are reserving a hell for the rest of us on Earth either way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
442 Posts
this is the only actual choice i still remember from the mbti: justice is more important than mercy. if it had been a pencil-and-paper test i would have bored a hole through the 'yes' bubble on that one.
I tend to vote no.

I also think the question is a rather stupid one and that the answer is more complex than a simple yes or no. It depends. The way I see it, both aren't even mutually exclusive. I can imagine scenarios where I'd want some sort of justice first and will give mercy later. But does that make justice more important? Not in my book. I conisder both to be equally important. That's why I think it's a stupid question. Come to think of it, "no" actually does the trick though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,271 Posts
''It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness''. - Disputed Source.

Or reveling in the darkness. Or just ignoring it. Whatever suits your case. Matter of fact is, your odds aren't as bad if you are respected. What other people do is my business insofar as I know they can also do that to me. And if I don't harness the image of someone who doesn't stand injustice, I'm setting myself up to be someone for whom no one will stand either.
Let's go with reveling... there is beauty in the dark night. And in darkness, you can be the light, as any idealistic romantic would know. Of course, what an introverted 'true neutral' 5w4 independent pragmatic type wishes to enlighten will differ from that of an extroverted 'chaotic good' 1w9 leader logician (as we've discussed elsewhere).

This seems more about personality type than objective principles but if you'd like to frame it morally; I'd be a 'bad' justice fighter (no interest/not my style) and I'm of better 'use' elsewhere. If the satisfaction to society (rather than my own) is your measure, fine; if my life's work leads to new medical related technology, as I hope it will, many people will benefit in a meaningful way.

There are different roads leading to human dignity. I have no problem with you taking your particular road. In fact I'm happy there are people like you in the world, but that has nothing to do with my introvert/science road. The nice thing about diversity (among NTJs, lol) is we'll be agents of change on different things.

As far as complicity goes, I did say there'll be no kicking of cats (or equivalent) in my presence. I don't expect anyone to stand for me.

You can't play the invisible act for long, especially if you're good at something.
You'd be surprised. Most people have never heard of James Simons, especially before he began doing interviews a few years ago. If you stay away from the media, including social, own a private rather than public company, be on the board, quietly go about your business without attracting attention in other ways etc you can just introvert away it seems, to a large degree anyway.

The invisible thing isn't an "act", it's a preference/lifestyle. And if it was put on you by an unfriendly social type as a negative signifier and you learned to use it as a strength rather than a weakness, defending yourself with the very thing they tried to hurt you with, even better. I like my pleasures perverse and my lemons made lemonade ice cold.

If you know you are respected and you still don't have the courage to put down injustice where you see it, you're just lazy not rational.
Every now and then some extrovert/Fe/social instinct type tells me I'm 'selfish' or I'm 'useless' or I 'act' too independent. Now I'm lazy and lack courage. Well, I did ask you a while ago to go back to being mean, so thank you for that :)

Because doing the opposite will earn you 2 things you definitely want to have: A just environment (here's why it matters: http://ncase.me/trust/) and a reputation as someone worthy.
Re the game, I scored 39 taking on a copycat style naturally. I'm no zero-sum gamer. I'm generally good at communicating/not assuming the worst immediately. I'm doing my part... what others choose to do is up to them. I guess you thought I'd flunk that or that somehow I'm the problem. I trust you know: 'True neutral' isn't negative. Not social isn't anti-social. Intovert isn't malfunctioning extrovert.

The alternative gains you nothing, just keeps you out of sight and out of mind.
Promise? :)

You'll be surprised at how easily and willingly people listen to you if they think you're worth their time.
It's my time I'm concerned about.

Oh and I love this quote: ''The hottest place in hell is reserved for those who remain neutral in times of crises''. (Dante Aleghieri) I don't believe in hell, but good thing that I know lazy people are reserving a hell for the rest of us on Earth either way.
Lazy lol. Evolution says introverts have a place on Earth. Some social types seem to disagree. It's odd to me that minding my own business isn't considered a valid position. It's also somewhat amusing that those who say they concern themselves with other's welfare do: *asterisk* just not the weirdos -- they should burn in hell if they don't conform. In case it isn't obvious: I got done apologizing for who I am a while back. So, you be you. I'll be me. I don't know whether your principles in logic allow for that though.
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top