Nevermind.
The Evil Side of Humanity?
Most personality theories deal with the mature version of the temperament. "NF Idealists are warm, cuddly, naturally altruistic; primarily interested in making everyone around them happier." But Hitler was an idealist, right?
What do the temperament types look like when they go bad?
Primarily, I am interested in your thoughts on the dark side of the SJ Guardian. Guardians are "stable, caring, law-abiding citizens who mow their lawn before the grass gets too high." But what happens when Guardians are broken--how do you break one?
I am posting this question on your wall because I already posted it on the SJ wall and didn't get many responses... I thought I might get better luck with you guys. I know it's a strange question but I am a writer and I want to know more about the dark side of my characters according to the integrity of their temperament.
Unfortunately for you guys, the dark side of the NT is pretty obvious--Stalin, Napoleon, Emperor Palpatine... Same goes for the SP's who splash their dysfunctional hedonsim all over Hollywood. NF's have a pretty deep dark side--borderline personality disorder, madness, raging irrationality.
But the SJs? All I can think of is Nurse Ratched from One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Keirsey says that when they become self-destructive, they tend to do it literally--i.e. suicide. Thoughts?
What do the temperament types look like when they go bad?
Primarily, I am interested in your thoughts on the dark side of the SJ Guardian. Guardians are "stable, caring, law-abiding citizens who mow their lawn before the grass gets too high." But what happens when Guardians are broken--how do you break one?
I am posting this question on your wall because I already posted it on the SJ wall and didn't get many responses... I thought I might get better luck with you guys. I know it's a strange question but I am a writer and I want to know more about the dark side of my characters according to the integrity of their temperament.
Unfortunately for you guys, the dark side of the NT is pretty obvious--Stalin, Napoleon, Emperor Palpatine... Same goes for the SP's who splash their dysfunctional hedonsim all over Hollywood. NF's have a pretty deep dark side--borderline personality disorder, madness, raging irrationality.
But the SJs? All I can think of is Nurse Ratched from One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Keirsey says that when they become self-destructive, they tend to do it literally--i.e. suicide. Thoughts?
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
nudge, nudge...egging you on. ????Nevermind.
Guardians are broken in the nature. They are conformist, consistent with society, they do what you tell them to do, they are like well trained dog.
evil SJs are the police when they beat black people because they're racist
or when they instigate terror plots and then arrest the would-be terrorist before they set off their bomb or whatever
just look at the US police state, that's evil SJs at work, led by evil NTs probably
or when they instigate terror plots and then arrest the would-be terrorist before they set off their bomb or whatever
just look at the US police state, that's evil SJs at work, led by evil NTs probably
Evil side of all types: When you order a big plate of fries after a long day and some asshole sits next to you and eats some of your fries without asking. Only then have you looked at the darkest corner of humankind. And once you stare into that ugly black vortex of evil, there's no returning to your sweet little life.
I gave a suggestion of a link. It turned out to be an inaccurate suggestion.nudge, nudge...egging you on. ????
About the topic,
I have to agree with merlin. I think what you are doing is equating what the Guardians say is the standard with the actual standard. There would be no difference, then, when trying to look at them.
They are just as broken as the rest of us, however, and maybe moreso because they are the majority and their personality forces its way into every aspect of our lives. They don't have to have an excuse for their actions, because they ARE the action.
I heard Bill Murray did this to a guy in a restaurant. When the guy looks up, indignation turning to astonishment, BM says to him "Nobody's going to believe you." and walks off without another word.Evil side of all types: When you order a big plate of fries after a long day and some asshole sits next to you and eats some of your fries without asking. Only then have you looked at the darkest corner of humankind. And once you stare into that ugly black vortex of evil, there's no returning to your sweet little life.
So antisemetic SJs might have been happy to serve as SS guard perhaps, or Javert from Les Miserables would likely have been an SJ--taking too much pleasure in the enforcement of unfair and hurtful rules out of a misguided belief that the person actually deserves it.
I suppose, then, that what drives their evil potential is fear of non-conformity. More than other types, perhaps, they are vulnerable to the sway of propaganda, fear-mongering, assuming non-conformity or personal differences to be indicative of a problem (leading to ill-founded prejudices such as racism or xenophobia), pointing fingers at easy targets because they lack the N to see the differences more deeply, or the P which is more willing to live and let live...
What about the guardians who become indignant about seniority issues? Like being "passed over" for a job or a desired role for someone they disparage as "younger, less responsible, etc." Like--to take it back to high school--the STJ friend who became all snarky because one of her "besties" dared to have a crush on the same guy: "I liked him first!"
What's up with that? Are they sincerely unable to see that a task is best handled by the person best suited for it--regardless of who's been there longer or who has desired that position more acutely? Or are they subconsciously aware of their ill-qualifications and--being unable to honestly address them, out of immaturity or fear perhaps--dishonestly find a scapegoat for their disappointment?
I mean, is all of SJ anger directed at non-conformity, or is there a sliver of deeper evil possible based on feelings of inadequacy being projected onto others? Was Javert being an asshole because he really resented Valjean's original crime, or was there a degree of illogical grudge involved in which (for instance) Javert's parents had been criminals and, being ashamed of his heritage, being terrified of his connection with the criminal class, he doled out justice with an extra degree of hatred? Almost a self-hatred?
And what's up with all the SJ's who try to get other people whom they don't like (NTs for instance) fired? I hear this so often--SJ feels humiliated by the NT (who, to be honest, often think meanly of their intelligence) and wages a long-standing crusade against them in order to get them fired. Are these crusades honest (based on "righteous anger" that the NT broke some of the rules--it doesn't matter to the SJ's that the rules didn't make any sense in the first place, or that they were causing systematic inefficiency)--or are they dishonest? --the preemptive destruction of someone they fear might destroy them first (fear that their incompetence might be real)?
And (not that I hope any of you have personal experience with this, but) what exactly would an SJ do to get someone fired? I mean, they can't break rules, right? They can't soil their conscience by doing something which is obviously wrong--wait in a dark corner with a knife, plan out a crime and frame their "enemy" in it--right? They play by the book, so how do you--legitimately--get someone fired who doesn't deserve to be fired? (Offhand, that is such a difficult task--hats off to any SJ who can pull this off...)
I suppose, then, that what drives their evil potential is fear of non-conformity. More than other types, perhaps, they are vulnerable to the sway of propaganda, fear-mongering, assuming non-conformity or personal differences to be indicative of a problem (leading to ill-founded prejudices such as racism or xenophobia), pointing fingers at easy targets because they lack the N to see the differences more deeply, or the P which is more willing to live and let live...
What about the guardians who become indignant about seniority issues? Like being "passed over" for a job or a desired role for someone they disparage as "younger, less responsible, etc." Like--to take it back to high school--the STJ friend who became all snarky because one of her "besties" dared to have a crush on the same guy: "I liked him first!"
What's up with that? Are they sincerely unable to see that a task is best handled by the person best suited for it--regardless of who's been there longer or who has desired that position more acutely? Or are they subconsciously aware of their ill-qualifications and--being unable to honestly address them, out of immaturity or fear perhaps--dishonestly find a scapegoat for their disappointment?
I mean, is all of SJ anger directed at non-conformity, or is there a sliver of deeper evil possible based on feelings of inadequacy being projected onto others? Was Javert being an asshole because he really resented Valjean's original crime, or was there a degree of illogical grudge involved in which (for instance) Javert's parents had been criminals and, being ashamed of his heritage, being terrified of his connection with the criminal class, he doled out justice with an extra degree of hatred? Almost a self-hatred?
And what's up with all the SJ's who try to get other people whom they don't like (NTs for instance) fired? I hear this so often--SJ feels humiliated by the NT (who, to be honest, often think meanly of their intelligence) and wages a long-standing crusade against them in order to get them fired. Are these crusades honest (based on "righteous anger" that the NT broke some of the rules--it doesn't matter to the SJ's that the rules didn't make any sense in the first place, or that they were causing systematic inefficiency)--or are they dishonest? --the preemptive destruction of someone they fear might destroy them first (fear that their incompetence might be real)?
And (not that I hope any of you have personal experience with this, but) what exactly would an SJ do to get someone fired? I mean, they can't break rules, right? They can't soil their conscience by doing something which is obviously wrong--wait in a dark corner with a knife, plan out a crime and frame their "enemy" in it--right? They play by the book, so how do you--legitimately--get someone fired who doesn't deserve to be fired? (Offhand, that is such a difficult task--hats off to any SJ who can pull this off...)
If this was true cops would not commit abuses. They stick to the power structure not the rules in themselves.And (not that I hope any of you have personal experience with this, but) what exactly would an SJ do to get someone fired? I mean, they can't break rules, right? They can't soil their conscience by doing something which is obviously wrong--wait in a dark corner with a knife, plan out a crime and frame their "enemy" in it--right? They play by the book, so how do you--legitimately--get someone fired who doesn't deserve to be fired? (Offhand, that is such a difficult task--hats off to any SJ who can pull this off...)
Not all cops are SJs. A lot of them are other, less rule-abiding types. SPs, for instance, make fantastic detectives. They like the danger, the focus, the hunt. I would be really surprised, actually, if most cops were SJs. The job is pretty unstable for a guy who prefers stability over french fries.If this was true cops would not commit abuses. They stick to the power structure not the rules in themselves.
Sure you have a point. I was following the flow of the discussion about the guardians. Those who leave the system think for them.Not all cops are SJs. A lot of them are other, less rule-abiding types. SPs, for instance, make fantastic detectives. They like the danger, the focus, the hunt. I would be really surprised, actually, if most cops were SJs. The job is pretty unstable for a guy who prefers stability over french fries.
Already had a rolling gigglefit, this has prolonged it.I heard Bill Murray did this to a guy in a restaurant. When the guy looks up, indignation turning to astonishment, BM says to him "Nobody's going to believe you." and walks off without another word.
Think for themselves you mean? I am not sure a guardian ever feels comfortable leaving the system. An evil SJ example would be Nurse Ratched on One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Never once did she break a rule or step outside the line.
An SJ stepping outside of the system seems as contrary to character as an INTJ preferring to knit over a game of Settlers of Catan.
An SJ stepping outside of the system seems as contrary to character as an INTJ preferring to knit over a game of Settlers of Catan.
Or forget to pay their bills on time.
That was my point. Stepping outside the system is not always equal to not follow blindly the rules.An SJ stepping outside of the system seems as contrary to character as an INTJ preferring to knit over a game of Settlers of Catan.
I am not following. What are we referring to? A bad cop? A vigilante? Let's try to specify the situation before trying to draw conclusions from it.
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Personality Cafe
A forum community dedicated to all ranges of personality types and people. Come join the discussion about health, behavior, care, testing, personality types, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
ENTJudgement
991 Replies
Ms. Aligned
713 Replies
WickerDeer
572 Replies
Join now to ask and comment!
